What is furry music?

The furry fandom is, by-and-large, a visual fandom. Internally, we elevate visual art to the point where sites like Fur Affinity and SoFurry are often referred to as "art sites", despite hosting various kinds of content. Similarly, outside attention on the fandom has tended to exaggerate fursuiting, another highly visual aspect of the fandom.

This focus on visual aspects is quantified in The State Of The Fandom 2008. Although this is far from the most recent set of results available from the Furry Survey it is the most complete report on the results. It shows that approximately 90% of furries consider artwork, 59% consider writing and only 23% consider music to be important to the furry fandom. In addition, 36% said that music was unimportant to the fandom, compared to 7% and 6% for writing and art respectively.

One of the difficulties music faces in the furry fandom is how it can even be considered furry. This has led to rather strange definitions of furry music, as from WikiFur:

Furry music is a term that is often used to describe music (of any particular genre) that is either performed by self-described members of the furry fandom, or centred around themes of a furry nature, or both.

The last definition, "centred around themes of a furry nature", is not controversial and is essentially the same criteria we use when judging whether a story or artwork is furry. I had in the past looked at the Furry Music Foundation site (now only semi-functional) and listened to few songs by Chama C. Fox. No one could really deny that his song, The Wolf In You is a furry song. We can judge the lyrics of a song by the same standards that we would apply to a piece of writing.

Who could you ask when they lack understanding?
Who could you tell that you're not of their kind?
More than just human shape, not only hairless ape.
What could they find inside your mind?

What should you do when others turn against you?
What to believe when all they know is hate?
Could your belief be true? Is there a wolf in you?
What is your fate at heaven's gate?

However, many furry musicians do not feature lyrics at all, instead producing only instrumental works. In what way can an instrumental track be considered furry? Some might say the sort of techno dance mixes that are popular for fursuit dances as "furry music", but there is nothing inherently furry about that. That music style existed before the furry fandom adopted it; its primary audience lies outside the fandom. In any case, describing something as furry merely because it is appreciated by a large number of furs is a much weaker claim than saying that it has an inherent property that makes it furry. If many furs enjoyed playing Call of Duty, would that make it a furry game?

One could make a more convincing case for an instrumental work inspired by furry themes to be furry. For example, 1922 saw the publication of French composer Camille Saint-Saëns' The Carnival of the Animals (Le carnaval des animaux). This is an instrumental work with each movement inspired by an animal and attempting to recreate the feeling or mood of the particular animal. If someone wrote a piece of music which conveyed the feeling of transforming into a werewolf as you gaze at the full moon then perhaps that could count as furry music.

However, considering how such a criterion could be applied to visual art would immediately suggest a fault with this line of reasoning. Music is, by its very nature, an abstract form of art. Would we be willing to accept an abstract piece of visual art to be furry art? Suppose one titled a work of art Blind Rage and produced a pure red canvas to symbolise the anger of a bull about to charge – would that be as furry as a picture of an anthro bull, eyes red, nostrils flaring in anger as he lowers his horns? I think not. Similarly, I would not consider something along the lines of The Carnival Of The Animals to be as furry as The Wolf In You.

Things become more confusing when we consider the first part of the suggested definition of furry music, "performed by self-described members of the furry fandom." To be honest, this seems to me to be a way for furry musicians to try to force themselves to be relevant. That's not to say that there's anything wrong with furry musicians; just that not everything has to be about the fandom, nor is all that a furry produces also furry.

When one considers such a classification one needs to ask the following questions, "Is there such a thing as gay music? Or right-handed music? Or vegetarian music?" A furry musician may be all of those things but we wouldn't consider them relevant to the sort of music they produce. There is such a thing as Christian music, but we know it from its lyrical themes, not from the religion of its producer. (Although I should admit there do appear to have been a small number of instrumental pieces classed as Christian music.) If one were to be particularly pedantic, and I'm afraid I am going to be, then let's really look at what "performed by self-described members of the furry fandom" actually means.

Performed is not the same as written. This would suggest that a furry playing any generic pop song is producing furry music. In addition it means that an instrumental track, written and performed by a furry, would be furry music while the same track performed by someone from outside the fandom would not be. Not only that, but if the mere act of doing something while identifying as a member of the furry fandom is enough to make that thing furry, then we will have to recognise furry cooking, furry commuting and furry going-to-the-toilet. Furthermore, "self-described member of the furry fandom" would mean that a furry song would cease to be a furry song if they person left the fandom and continued to perform it!

It's easy to complain about poor definitions, but the challenge of defining what is and isn't furry remains, with music being one of the trickier areas. I have tried to improve the definition of furry before but, while it stimulated much debate, I do not recall any consensus. Some even question the need to know what we're talking about in the first place! I'm not going to try to define furry music here, although mine would probably not be far off from furry musician NIIC's:

For me, personally, if we can properly define music as being "furry music", I believe that kind of music must contain lyrics and a story about anthropomorphic characters, or contain language that empathizes with the Furry community.

I will instead try to leave you with a mental tool applicable to more than just the furry fandom. If you are going to say that something is furry, whether it be music or art or anything else, you should be able to explain what you could change to make it stop being furry. So a furry picture of an anthro leopard fighting a pack of feral wolves would cease to be furry if you changed the leopard to a human fighting a pack of feral wolves.

Parodies are great at showing you how changing aspects of something can morph the meaning or change the group's focus. So, Lord of the Rings is not a brony movie but Lord of the Rings Reenacted by Ponies is. And Beyonce's Single Ladies is not a furry song, but All the Single Furries! is. In both these cases we can immediately see which aspects have caused the change from mundane (for lack of a better word) to brony or furry. It's both the new visual accompaniment but also the audio component. All the Single Furries! is a furry song by virtue of its lyrics, with or without the video. Single Ladies as a song would not be furry even with All the Single Furries!' visuals, although the combined music video would still be furry.

If you find something where no matter what you change about it – and by "it" I am referring specifically to the furry item, not the process or person that created it – it is always furry, then then you have something where no property is giving it its furry character. That is probably a sign that it shouldn't be considered furry at all.

So you also believe, assuming the furry musician fits the average, that it's also a white song? And a male song? And do you also think that cooking done by a furry is furry cuisine?

"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

I used to help a furry archive gather media of such genre, and two sections were dedicated to music videos and album covers which could be labelled as "furry" just because they had fursuits or anthropomorpic animals in it, even though the artist wasn't a member of the fandom or the song itself didn't talk about animals (for example, we added Bob Sinclair's "Rainbow of Love" video which is basically a cartoon with a singing, guitar-playing bird, or some covers from Aerosmith's albums, which feature some human-bodied sphynx cats).

I usually had issues with this exactly because the furry music classification is very vague. Some contributors used to suggest songs that came from cartoons with animals and which, by their definition, were "furry" because of this (think about "The Lion King"'s soundtrack, for example). I had to refuse such suggestions because otherwise, if I had to add every single song from a Disney classic or Don Bluth's or similar, the archive would have resulted to be a huge, miles-long list; although I had to admit their criteria can't be proven wrong either, and incidentally I found such soundtracks to be aired on "The Rabbit Hole"'s radio station playlist.
Years ago, to recall another example, I stumbled upon a flash animation on FA featuring a "chipmunked" remix of a techno song that was very popular at the time (warning, sound); this partly lead younger me to believe that every song remix with such a tone of voice could be considered furry because, by the definition of some individuals, anthro animals would have talked/sounded just like that in real life. And since we're talking about high-pitched voices, what about the Chipmunks' songs? We know it's just a technical effect, but in the fiction of the song, most lyrics are sung by anthropomorphics squirrels.

Personally, I think Kurrel's "The Furry Album" is the epithome of what could be considered furry music: performed by a (albeit ex) member of furry fandom, sung by an anthro crow in its fiction, and covering furry themes in its lyrics. Some tracks are instrumental, but as I imagine them to be played by the artist's fursona, I still think they have some degree of furriness in it; afterall, most Fox Amoore's compositions I've listened to are instumental only, but if we think that a human-like red fox is playing them, then the furriness of the piece actually makes sense.
Anthropomorphic animals are fictuos, and we probably have to look at such masterpieces by their fictuos point of view: if we read a book which is written to appear like a collection of journal entries or letters, and it's implied that the character writing is anthropomorphic, I'd personally still consider it a furry piece even if the character never mentions, as to make a silly example, their tail.
Yes, it doesn't have the same prominence as a novel or a song which esplicitly specifies human-animal characteristics, but people can decide to call it "borderline" or "implied furry".

I have to conclude that such a definition has to be considered personal, exactly like the discussion about wether a piece of artwork done outside the furry fandom BUT with anthro animals as protagonists should be considered a furry masterpiece or not (Disney's Robin Hood, to name another one of its classics); I personally think it can be called such, though I've seen others which have very negative opinions about this just because it isn't done by a member of the fandom or isn't on FA (at least the original masterpiece).

This once again comes back to the ambiguity of the word "Furry", and mainly along the two main lines.

A) Furry is an adjective describing a character that has animal features and traits combined with human cognitive.
B) Furry is a noun describing a fan of content which contains character which that fall under the former definition.

And if that weren't confusing enough we have a definition C coming around which has two destinct ideas where the debate is coming in.

C) (a)Furry is an adjective describing the content of the noun as focusing on characters that fit definition A.
(b)Furry is an adjective describing a work that was create by a person who falls under definition B.

So that ambiguity has drawn a secondary ambiguity. Even worse C(a) and C(b) as an adjective would be placed in front of a similar noun. So if someone is using the C(b) and one's mind goes toward C(a) they would say it's not C(a).

Interestingly, if you were to ask a non-furry if "Furry" is a genre (if C(a) exists), when it comes to content they may say "no". Furry is just the content of the story, the genre of the story they are in is what elements the plot are using.

For instance, I have submitted stories to a Pulp anthology, a Sci-Fi anthology, and most recently a Noir anthology. Each are ones that would focus on furry characters. Furries would most certainly call them "Furry Pulp", "Furry Sci-Fi", or "Furry Noir". However, those outside the fandom may just see them as "Pulp", "Sci-Fi", or "Noir".

Now here's the thing. If I went "My Zudukii novel is a 'Furry' work", most furrys would say agree. Why? Because it happens that both C(a) and C(b) definitions are accurate when describing the novel. The focus is a furry character and it was written by a furry, so there is no confusion when someone calls it a furry book.

Now let's take one of those things away: Is "Animal Farm" or "Watership Down" a furry novel? Under C(a) yes, under C(b) no. This is where some debate may fall into place. However, from my experience, more furries lean toward C(a) than C(b). I can say this because, let's go the other way.

Is "The Silver Circle" by Kyell Gold a furry novel?

This is where things will get far more interesting. Kyell Gold has written a lot of well known furry fiction, and certainly falls under the definition of being within the fandom. However, The Silver Circle is a paranormal romance book, which makes it just about as furry as Twilight to someone following definition C(a).

This also happens when it comes to music. Which, with very rare exceptions, fall within the spectrum of C(b). More often if music is going to fall in the spectrum of C(a) it's going to be because of lyric (Ex: "What does the Fox say?") In fact I'd go so far as to say it's nigh impossible to C(a) music without lyric.

That's because music, melody, is formless pure cognition. It's already thought free of the form of homosapien. It's why it is the universal language. It is not bound by human form. And since furry is supposed to be taking that human core of cognition and putting it into another animal form the person seeking to do so will get stuck... music is already anthropomorphic (but not furry), so it's hard to "Furry anthropomorphize" something that already is outside of the human form.

It is when music has lyric that it anchors the fleeting tones into a more grounded form. It's why country songs, rap songs, and such tend towards particular topics. From the one performing the music, to what the lyrics are saying, that is what transforms music into its human form.

So is there a chance that someone in the future will use lyric and combine it with a musical style that make it just different enough for others to start catagorizing it under C(a). I'd never say never.

In the end though, to me, as someone who plans to continue to be a writer, I can understand it's hard when people label, or don't label, your works in the same section you as the creator pictured it. You want it to be a serious horror, but others see it as a comedy. You want it to be a fantasy, but another sees it as more Sci-Fi. In the end though, labels are made for the help of others to describe and categorize things in ways that are most helpful to them as an individual. It may be tempting to try and control these labels to force others to categorize things in the way you want them to, but that neither helps you nor your content consumers.

The only labels, as a content creator, you should focus on is whether they feel your work is quality or is lacking and what to improve on. All other things are mere trivia.

The limits of relying on a 7-year-old Furry survey are, well, it's 7 years old and this thing has grown a lot in that time.

What I call the "Furclub" Thing started after that. It's an influential focal point for some parts of subculture - the live part, where people actually meet, in places that draws new people and not just people already into it. Night life with music may be in some places the #1 vector for "fresh blood" to Furry. San Francisco Bay Area Furry is not all of Furry, but it's an important center. Their music/night club meet is the #1 popular monthly activity for it.

A survey that was also only offered online also misses that live event dimension. So an article missing that stuff is already behind the times and outside the places.

"Music is, by its very nature, an abstract form of art". Music also has a culture... you can quote a piece of music for instant recognition to the right people. Whistle the first 4 notes of Beethoven's 9th, or the birthday song, and everybody will know what that is and perhaps where and what it looks like. "Name That Tune" works that way.

Rave/electronic music typically at fur con dances brings crossover of subcultures. You can say it has loose association as "furry music" for the right people.

"furry music, "performed by self-described members of the furry fandom." To be honest this seems to me to be a way for furry musicians to try force themselves to be relevant." - Yes and No :) - Music has meaning of time and place, so a context (like a famous movie moment, or con dances) attached can make it that.

"Is there such a thing as gay music?" - disco, hi-NRG"Or vegetarian music?" - Morrissey"There is such a thing as Christian music but we know it from its lyrical themes" - hymns, even with no lyrics

"Performed is not the same as written. This would suggest that a furry playing any generic pop song is producing furry music." - Covering a song works that way to make it yours. Consider a song about masks being made Furry.

"if the mere act of doing something while identifying as a member of the furry fandom is enough to make that thing furry then we will have to recognise furry cooking," ... if there was a Furry Cooking scene, then maybe... there is a Furclub Thing. :)

What I would love to see from this, is a request to many "Furry musicians" about what defines their music, and compare all the answers to NIIC's.

Hey... maybe I should do that for Dogpatch Press and link it to this article... what do you think?

"The limits of relying on a 7-year-old Furry survey are, well, it's 7 years old and this thing has grown a lot in that time."

I know. I did take a quick look at the more recent surveys but they didn't report the same question. Apparently the raw data will be made public shortly so that might help to see if things have changed.

"Rave/electronic music typically at fur con dances brings crossover of subcultures. You can say it has loose association as "furry music" for the right people."

I don't deny there can be an association just that that isn't sufficient. There could also be an association with furries and going bowling and eating pizza. That doesn't make those activities furry. I think there is a distinction between what is furry and what furries do.

Hadn't heard of the second guy but it seems like these all suffer from the same problem that furry music does.

""There is such a thing as Christian music but we know it from its lyrical themes" - hymns, even with no lyrics"

Now this is an interesting point! Not the instrumental stuff but recognizing a hymn even without the words. If we took a furry song but only played the instrumental section but not the vocals would it be furry? In that case I'd tentatively say yes. Of course it's often very difficult to make clear cut decisions on the borderlines of issues.

"Covering a song works that way to make it yours. Consider a song about masks being made Furry."

If there's a change to the song then that's fine, I mentioned that. If it's the identical song just performed by a different person then I'm not sure how you could say it's been made furry.

"Hey... maybe I should do that for Dogpatch Press and link it to this article... what do you think?"

That sounds excellent. I'm obviously in favour of more exposure. :p Also it's nice to then expand the discussion and those responses could be quite interesitng, depending on how much thought they have put into it.

"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

So, here's an example of how covering a song can change meaning without changing the song. Tainted Love by Soft Cell, they're very known for the song they borrowed. It was an obscure soul song that got redone with synthesizers (a novel delivery that put soul into music formerly known as cold and robotic like Kraftwerk.) And it came at the beginning of the AIDS epidemic so while the writing had nothing to do with that, it hit the zeitgeist. It wasn't the same music after that, it was New Wave.

"There is such a thing as Christian music but we know it from its lyrical themes" - hymns, even with no lyrics

Yes, but if a song has lyrics, pulling the lyrics and people still recognizing it as religious... it was still made religious by the originally attached lyrics.

If a song never had lyric could it truly be defined into a genre?

Usually one could say by instrumentation that is common. Jazz is a particular example. All those new electronic genres, almost to the point of the inclusion or exclusion of one instrumentation is the difference.

One could argue the slight differences between techno, trance, dubstep,etc that cause confusion on those unfamiliar with the genres is similar to jazz and swing to where the instruments used are similar but the overall feel is different. Both, to the unaffiliated, can be confusing to define and they may mistakenly put one into the other.

In order to make a furry song (under the C(a) definition), then, it would require a lyric to make it such. Barring that, if one wants to go for the greater challenge of making a distinctive sound/melody/instrumentation that could very well be considered furry sound, then I think one has to come up with that distinctive sound and put the lyrics on it tying it to furry so the two become interchangeable (as with your example of hymn).

I don't like the backing some furry musicians get just for being furry and not for being good. But I do believe what you said and agree with your opinion quite a bit. Just wanted to throw my two cents in about furry musicians. I'd like to say a lot more but I don't know if mobile online is the best place.

No one is saying whether music is furry is the same as a genre like rock or pop. It's just a description of the music. In the same way we are perfectly fine with saying there is such a thing as furry art, based on content, but we don't divide art into pencil sketches, digital, pastel and furry.

"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

I guess I could mention what fueled my post. I seen a few musicians using furries as an audience for their completely regular not-furry-at-all music. Musicians who could not find an audience anywhere else.

Well that's just furries supporting other furries. I don't really think there's anything wrong with that.

"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

The filking scene is notorious for this. Mainly folk music about general sci/fi and fantasy, but often heard at alot of furry conventions. I think this has less to do with musicians trying to find an audience and marketing to furries than it does with convention organizers and attendees who have alot of crossover with sci-fi and fantasy conventions where filking is common place. Alot of furry convention staff are the same staff as you'll find at other local fan based conventions. They are often staff because they enjoy doing things with their friends who are also into this, and are just bringing their friends in who do content for other fan based cons to do content at furry cons. Just look at the panels at furry cons, and you'll see alot of this.

Place is part of genre, one of the most "norwegian" (or scandinavian) genres of recent times I can think of is Black Metal, characterized by themes like vikings and paganism, coldness and extremes. Music style, story and place can all be part of genre. A scene happens when a few influential artists get followings and grow around shared ideas. They don't have to do the same kind of music, some genres are very loose just because some bands supported each other (punk included everything from fashion and art to zines and graphics just because they were DIY).

I don't think there is exactly enough of a scene to support "furry music" too much (just a few of "the usual names you always hear about at cons") but don't dismiss it too quickly, things are happening with Furry dance parties starting now, which use Furry DJ's. I have announcements about two new ones coming this month.

It's definitely conceivable that "furry music" can exist and I would love if it did. :)

They cater to furry audiences, promote furry shows, project furry videos behind them. They play whatever style suits them, the difference is they share a subculture. Ways of finding/hearing music defines them too, for example soundtrack music is no style at all, but it has fans, a section in stores, notable composers, etc.

I think there is a lot more to DJing than meets the eyes. I got to understand the concept by really liking Digitalism. They have a recognizable style and do "albums" as well as live mixing - a bit more indie band in concept than usual. A good DJ combines curator, composer, performer, promoter into it's own thing you can only call DJ. It's not easy to do well.

Well, I was being a bit facetious. There are degrees of Disc Jockey, just like there's a difference between a critique from someone on the Youtube comment section versus ones from the A&E section of the Times (or even those that make actual Youtube critic videos even). But they'll both call themselves critics.

I'm sure there are the hard working DJs out there who know at least one person who calls themselves a DJ that rather not call themselves by that title. Because they too couldn't tell the difference between them and an iPod shuffle when they close their eyes (or worse the shuffle may do a better job).

I think furry dj would fall under the same category as music. In particular, musicians who make instrumentals.

Is someone a furry dj? Ask yourself this: Are they or their dj set inspired by the furry fandom?

Yes, furry djs very very rarely write music, and when they do, they may often aspire to be world famous musicians so tend to avoid furry themes which may alienate them from being booked at the largest music festivals in the world. But DJing is about the inspiration that gets them up there to do it. And if it's furry they are doing it for, then they are a furry dj.

Now as to the quality of djs, from those who just push a button and let the computer do all that mixing shit for them, so they can get on stage and wave their hands in the air, fursuit, and get that glorious attention their parents never gave them, to those who masterfully mix by ear, resample real time, scratch, read the audience, and give a genuine performance and realize they are there for the audience, which would be there whether they were the dj or not... Now that's another thread entirely.

I don't know about this... Hmm...
Can there really be "furry music"? I mean when is it? When is it not?

I'm a furry, and I actually make music, mainly inspired by random ranges of 'video game music' I think..
Though I don't think my music is 'high quality' (or is it?), it's more like basic midis maybe. Sometimes using a better soundfont than the Microsoft one.

One time I think I made one based off a feeling where in the world, so many furries were walking around, but didn't name it after it I guess. But you know, like certain thoughts effects me to make it.. I guess that was 'furry music'?

Or like someone sort of said or said: If you make one about some morphism creature or about a creature with human characteristics, it's 'furry music'. At least maybe if it's directly about the idea of anthropomorphism.

Either, one, two separate people thought this was clever enough trolling to be worth five stars, or, two, two people were too dumb to realize the first song is a not very subtle bestiality joke and the other two songs, while not actually making much sense in the context of furry or particularly clever, are also not nice, either, or three, the guy bulbed himself.

I thought of an interesting comparison. "College Rock." Long ago that was the cool stuff, before it was called "alternative" (and now probably just "hipster".) It was anything from new wave, post punk and indie, to rap. It was what MTV played late at night when it still had music videos, or from casual college radio DJ's who could put on whatever they wanted, and little festivals hosting non mainstream bands. They're meaningless catch-all terms, describing no style at all... but useful to write histories afterwards. Turning into "alternative" is really well covered here. http://www.avclub.com/features/whatever-happened-to-alternative-nation

One of these days maybe Furry music will have enough musicians to deserve a term. Neonbunny is one. I'll invite him to the topic.

yes, there can be alot of discussion about what furry music is. One other scene that has alot of music prelevant in it's fandom is the My Little Pony / Broney scenes.

Yes, furry is different in that there's not one commercial show that we all create our theme around, but rather a larger concept theme of Anthropomorphic art. But I think this still really relates.

This is the guidelines that the largest MLP web site uses for their definition of pony music. 1. Song must be about MLP characters and world. or 2. Song must use samples from the show. or 3. Must be inspired by the show/world, as in the case of instrumentals.

I think this can very much relate to furry.

Is it furry music?

1. Is the song about anthorpomorphic characters, people, or themes?
2. Does it use samples from things related to furry fandom/art/characters/people/themes/culture?
3. Was the song directly inspired by the fandom/art/characters/people/themes/culture, as in the case of instrumentals?

Using these 3 determining factors, then yes, furries can make non furry music, and non furries can make furry music. Just because a furry makes music, doesn't mean it's necessarily furry music, as is the case of a furry trying to make video gaming music.

When it comes to MLP music then I rather like Slyphstorm, although I think a lot of his work is based on songs written by other MLP musicians. They're still really nice though and usually better than the original.

I agree with pretty much everything here except whether point 3 is useful, particularly in the case of instrumentals. I've heard for example that Lord of the Rings was, at partly, inspired by WWII but I doubt that anyone would be willing to group it with historical dramas or other WWII films/music. However Disturb's Never Again, which makes explicit reference to the Holocaust, would be appropriate in such a collection.

"If all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind."
~John Stuart Mill~

About the author

a student and Growlithe from South Africa/Austria, interested in science, anime and power metal

I'm a fur from South Africa, now living in Austria, who got into the fandom through my interest in pokemon and writing fanfiction. Outside of furry, I have spend a lot of my time in gaming (particularly Dota 2) and science.